Labour strife in Solomons

From a Honiara correspondent

The labour laws in the Solomon Islands may be changed following an inquiry by a tribunal into a dispute on the Honiara waterfront which led to an 11-day strike in August. The main issue for the tribunal was whether the 50 stevedores concerned should be paid for the period they were on strike.

The tribunal, presided over by Mr Fred Osifelo, was also required to de cide whether the Ports Authority should pay more to stevedores. The stevedores asked for an increase of 25 per cent for seniors and 30 per cent for juniors.

Members of the tribunal were not in complete agreement, and it was left to Mr Osifelo to use his powers to make six awards and recommenda tions. First, he ruled that the steve dores were not entitled to any wages for the time they were on strike. Then he came up with an odd one—that money paid to them by the Commis sioner of Labour, would not have to be paid back. (Apparently the steve dores were entitled to some sort of relief while they were on strike.) Mr Osifelo said the money paid by the Commissioner of Labour should become a charge on public funds to preserve good relationships between the government, the union concerned, and the Ports Authority.

Mr Osifelo then decided the union demands for increased wages were too great, but he still gave them a whack ing rise—2o per cent up for seniors and 25 per cent for juniors.

He decided that the Ports Authority had treated the workers fairly. This

ruling was on one of the terms of reference—whether employers fol lowed the government’s advice that all workers who went right back to work after the strike should get their jobs back without loss of seniority.

Mr Osifelo indemnified the Ports Authority and the union on costs— neither could claim from the other any money it spent on the strike.

He strongly recommended that the government act urgently to change the labour laws to protect the rights of both employers and employees, es pecially the law covering strikes. Both sides should be told clearly what was involved in compulsory arbitration and compulsory negotiation. He suggested that the government set up a com mittee to work out the changes. The committee should comprise three members of the union, three from em ployers and three from the govern ment.

The general secretary of the Solo mon Islands General Workers’ Union, Mr Bartholomew Ulufa’alu, was not altogether happy about the recom mendations. He claimed Mr Osifelo was “scared” to award some sort of compensation to workers dismissed on the ground that it lacked the power, as the government had failed to con sult the Ports Authority on conditions which led up to the strike. The tribunal failed to consider the social consequences of an award which affected those workers who lost their employment with the Ports Authority.

Mr Ulufa’alu also questioned the tribunal finding that the workers had been fairly treated.